In the Company of Others: Perspectives on Community, Family and Culture

As a sociologist, I might not generally have come across this
edited collection by 'distinguished philosophers', although as a feminist I am of course
familiar with the works of people such as Sara Ruddick and Rosemarie Tong, both of
whom contribute original pieces to this collection. However, I am very pleased to have
read this book, and some of the chapters are ones that will certainly form an important
contribution to my own teaching and research work in the sociology of family
lives.

The book is divided into three parts, concerning Community, Family and Culture, the
first being the shortest and the last being the longest sections. I am going to discuss the
parts in reverse order. My strongest reservation about the book as a whole is that the
parts do not hold together very well. Various themes of community, family and culture
do run through all the pieces, but by the end of the book, community and family are
being used in a very broad sense indeed and the connections are quite loose.

Taking the last part first, the article by Virginia Held, for example, is largely a
discussion about the role of commercial pressures in shaping the production of 'culture'
(argued to be distinct from social structure), and the possibilities for changing this.
Next comes a piece by Friedman, seeking to dispel the myths that feminists are anti-
motherhood, families, men and sex, which some of my more traditional (and
prejudiced?) students might do well to read. This is followed by a chapter by Tong, on
the contributions that feminist perspectives may make to debates on choice and freedom
around the new reproductive technologies. This chapter provides some very effective
summaries of major feminist ontological and epistemological perspectives, as well as
offering her own ideas in developing the notions of an autokoenomous ontology
combined with a positional epistemology. The next writer, Warren, also offers a very
useful discussion about the different meanings of 'home'. She then goes on to
introduce her own value perspectives via the notion of homes that are 'functional'. Her
argument develops with some very global statements about relationships between
women and nature, that seem to have echoes of Rosaldo's earlier work, as well as
risking marginalizing men from a reconsideration of nature and the environment. The
book concludes with a piece by Iannone about the expatriate experience. By the end of
the book, I did rather wonder if the powerful, emotionally laden concepts of 'home'
and 'family' were being somewhat hijacked, to encourage the reader's positive
response to the value statements being made (although perhaps this in an unfair
comment?).

As well as covering a range of rather diverse topics, the collection also includes a range
of philosophical perspectives. In addition to the feminist writers found in part three,
there are also two articles in part two concerned with feminist ideas, although with very
differing points of view. Thus Summers urges philosophers to pay more attention to the
everyday morality of family members (presuming she knows what this is), and then
goes on to launch a virulent attack on American feminism (it would seem that she had
not read the piece by Friedman, responding to just such arguments as Summers is
making). The most exciting chapter in the book, for my own interests, is the following
chapter by Ruddick, contributing to debates about the relationship between ethics of
justice and of care. In the process, she considers possible problems in applying
concepts of justice to family life, particularly concerning the underlying notions of
individuality and relationships involved. There is much food for thought in this
discussion. While at times I found it a little abstract, it also relates very significantly to
issues about public and private ways of being, a long-standing interest of my own.

The third article in this section is by Wong, also considering the relationship between
ethics of care and justice. He also argues the need to consider both in relation to family
lives, while also expressing care with regard to cultural diversity eg. around underlying
conceptions of the individual. Wong also has an article in the first part, which
introduced me for the first time to the ideas of Confuscianism. While this was extremely
interesting, it involved quite a lengthy exposition which, in itself, did not make ready
connections with the themes of community and family. However, by the end of the
piece, Wong is arguing that Confuscianism has a particular contribution to make to our
understanding of the importance and meaning of families, as well as other primary
groups. Finally, to end at the beginning, the first chapter in the book, by Mason,
discusses differing concepts of 'community' which, he argues, often get confused in
debates. He also suggests that ideas of Confuscianism offer a way forward, although
liberalism is still seen to have a part to play in valuing neutrality while also valuing
diversity.

At the end of the book, I was left pondering the relationship between philosophy and
sociology. At times, I felt that sweeping statements were being made that might lead to
cries of, 'Where's your evidence?' in sociology. On the other hand, sociology has
always of course depended on underlying philosophical orientations. Indeed, Iannone's
description of philosophy might equally be applied to at least some forms of sociology,
concerning a '... wonder about the familiarity that everyone takes for granted' (p. 202).
I certainly found at least parts of this particular philosophical collection extremely
illuminating and useful for my interests as a sociologist.